You Want to See the Journalistic Sausage Being Made — Get Tomorrow’s Headlines Today

If the Academy Awards run true to form, the show will end at nine, and my story will be due fifteen minutes later. Not only that, but most of the stuff that goes into the story will take place in the last 25 minutes, making it difficult to slam everything out in time. To make matters even worse, the most hastily written article will also probably be one of the year’s most read.

Anyway, so this year I’m trying something new. I’m picking three possible winners in each category and writing a paragraph about each. Even if who I’m guessing wins, the paragraphs will have to be altered to fit into the flow of the story and match up with other facts, etc. But I’m thinking it might be good to have something going in.

And so for your pleasure are three possible (rough first draft) opening paragraphs to tomorrow’s Academy Awards article.

Michael Clayton:

Few thought it was possible, but on Sunday night when the best picture winner was announced, “Michael Clayton,” Tony Gilroy’s story of high-stakes corruption and murder took home the top prize. As much as when “Crash” won two years ago, the announcement left Academy Awards prognosticators scratching their heads, trying to imagine how the well-acted, downbeat thriller squeaked ahead of the two supposed frontrunners, “No Country for Old Men” and “There Will Be Blood.”

Without looking at the vote totals, it’s impossible to tell how “Michael Clayton” managed it, and there will be theories to spare. One possible scenario is that “Juno” was stronger than expected, taking votes away from “No Country for Old Men”; that “There Will Be Blood” evened the field, attracting voters who admired its audacity and grand scale, and that “Michael Clayton” had an unexpected base of support that managed to push it to the front of a crowded field. In any case, it’s safe to assume that future cultural critics will read much into the film’s unexpected victory, and will see in its caustic view of the law and big business a commentary on the times.

NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN:

Joel and Ethan Coen were the big winners at the Academy Awards presentation Sunday night, when their film “No Country for Old Men” won a total of — awards, including best —- , best —– and best —-. Though the best picture win was expected, the across-the-board scale of their triumph was something of a surprise, in an eclectic year in which several films had passionate advocates. Their victory dwarfed their previous Academy Awards success with “Fargo,” which won two Oscars (Actress and Original Screenplay) at the ceremony in 1997.

THERE WILL BE BLOOD

Paul Thomas Anderson’s “There Will Be Blood” was the upset winner at last night’s Academy Awards, taking the prize that many observers expected would go to the Coen Brothers’ “No Country for Old Men.” In accepting the award, a jubilant Anderson told a packed hall at the Kodak theater, “——— ”

Indeed, though the smart money had been calling it for “No Country for Old Men,” the smarter money, looking to Academy history, saw the “There Will Be Blood” juggernaut from a month off. The fact is that the Academy, since its inception, has always had a weakness for grand-scale films, and “There Will Be Blood,” a western epic taking place over the course of two decades, was the biggest of the films nominated. The Academy also has a tendency to favor the worst of the nominated films (e.g., “Crash”), but when the worst is also the biggest, as was the case here (as with “Wings,” “Braveheart” and “Titanic”), that film is all but a shoo-in.